12:47:48 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dpub-aria
12:47:48 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/06/30-dpub-aria-irc
12:58:25 <mgylling> mgylling has joined #dpub-aria
12:58:26 <tzviya> Meeting: DPUB-ARIA TelCo
12:58:46 <tzviya> Chair: Tzviya
12:58:48 <ivan> present+ ivan
12:58:53 <tzviya> present+ Tzviya
12:58:57 <janina> present+ Janina
13:01:42 <mgylling> Matt Garrish will be late, stuck with a kid
13:02:37 <tzviya> present+ mgylling
13:03:00 <tzviya> present+ Rich
13:03:09 <MichaelC> present+ MichaelC
13:03:21 <tzviya> scribenick: Tzviya
13:06:27 <tzviya> Markus: The core problem is a growing suspicion that ARIA might not be the right place for our non-accessibility use cases. We have terms (semantics) for specialized domains
13:07:11 <tzviya> ...As we tried adding the DPUB-ARIA vocab to EPUB 3.1, and the response we got from the EPUB community was "What about the rest of our terms?"
13:07:41 <MichaelC> q+ to ask if structured extensibility mechanism helps
13:07:49 <MichaelC> q+ to ask about implementation lag regardless of mechanism chosen
13:08:12 <tzviya> ...From an accessibility perspective DPUB-ARIA is valuable, but we are unsure how to move forward. We don't want to keep flip-flopping.
13:08:18 <MichaelC> q+ to ask about relationship to other discussions wrt ARIA, HTML
13:08:22 <tzviya> ack m
13:08:22 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to ask if structured extensibility mechanism helps and to ask about implementation lag regardless of mechanism chosen and to ask about relationship to other
13:08:25 <Zakim> ... discussions wrt ARIA, HTML
13:09:09 <MichaelC> q+ to mention ARIA perspective on implicit ARIA semantics
13:09:43 <tzviya> Ivan: It would theoretically possible to say that we keep DPUB-ARIA for accessibility terms and use another method for non-a11y terms. But, this is not really a viable option from an authoring persepctive.
13:10:14 <tzviya> Micheal: Would a structured extensibibility mechanism be helpful?
13:10:35 <ivan> q+
13:11:14 <tzviya> ...This would mean not going necessarily building it through the ARIA WG. ARIA has been involved in some discussion in how it should be involved in HTML. This has been in brought to TAG.
13:12:04 <mgylling> q?
13:12:10 <ivan> q-
13:12:12 <MichaelC> ack me
13:12:12 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to mention ARIA perspective on implicit ARIA semantics
13:12:19 <mgylling> q+ rich
13:12:28 <tzviya> ...In ARIA, the concept of implicit ARIA semantics exists. A different mechanism would still perhaps have a mapping.
13:12:42 <tzviya> ivan: clarify the structured extension mechanism
13:12:48 <ivan> q+
13:13:21 <tzviya> ack rich
13:14:38 <tzviya> rich: This is the first I've heard of this problem. You've taken a lot of ARIA resources to make this happen.
13:14:40 <tzviya> q+
13:16:04 <tzviya> rich: We have written the mappings, and it's really close to CR. Clearly there are other issues that haven't been addressed.
13:16:08 <tzviya> ack iv
13:16:22 <MichaelC> q+ to say I´m not hearing an ultimatum, I´m hearing issues that bubbled up
13:16:51 <tzviya> ivan: This question has been asked many times. We have asked about the extension mechanism numerous times. This is not new.
13:17:06 <tzviya> ...We have never received a satisfactory answer
13:17:30 <MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/ARIAExtensions
13:18:03 <MichaelC> ack me
13:18:03 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say I´m not hearing an ultimatum, I´m hearing issues that bubbled up
13:18:14 <tzviya> Michael: we may not have understood the extent of the concerns, but we knew that there were concerns
13:18:16 <tzviya> q-
13:18:40 <tzviya> ivan: if the revised extensibility with HTML works out, that is fine
13:19:17 <tzviya> ...we basically had the choice of doing this via extension to HTML (a la ITS) or doing this via ARIA
13:19:28 <MichaelC> q+ to say I think the HTML extension process is realistically similar to the current ARIA extension process
13:20:12 <tzviya> ...we chose role attr because we wanted the built in a11y
13:20:23 <MichaelC> q+ to say the HTML and ARIA extension processes require a standalone implementation phase; are you looking for a process that doesn´t have that timeline cruft?
13:21:26 <MichaelC> q+ to talk about ¨vocabulary registries¨ and the concerns they´ve had
13:21:28 <tzviya> ...if you (ARIA) can make it so that if a given community (DPUB) can add a list 50 terms that are not necessarily a11y-specific, then we are fine
13:21:44 <janina> q+ to say that blocks experienced in one group would probably come up in another
13:22:00 <tzviya> ..."implemenatation" means different things in different environments
13:22:32 <MichaelC> q+ to say the ARIA WG inherently focuses on AAPI mappings as implementations, but there are certainly other implementations to push
13:22:38 <tzviya> ...if this is in an AAM, then it means one thing, if it is just a structural semantic for the purpose of publisher workflow, it is a differernt story
13:22:58 <tzviya> ...the implementation burden is on the publishing community
13:23:19 <MichaelC> q+ Rich
13:23:27 <tzviya> ...What we need is an agreement with the html community
13:23:40 <tzviya> rich: you have the ability to not map the terms
13:23:45 <tzviya> ack ri
13:24:16 <tzviya> ...you have a prefixed role set, and if they are not mapped, then they are ignored
13:24:26 <tzviya> Ivan: Will the WG accept that?
13:25:06 <tzviya> Rich: when you came in, you said that you wanted to support a11y, so we thought you wanted the terms mapped
13:25:56 <MichaelC> q+ to say HTML WG at the moment probably doesn´t accept ARIA roles as HTML semantics outside of AAPI mappings; so may need a process to work directly with them
13:26:38 <MichaelC> ack me
13:26:38 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say I think the HTML extension process is realistically similar to the current ARIA extension process and to say the HTML and ARIA extension processes
13:26:41 <Zakim> ... require a standalone implementation phase; are you looking for a process that doesn´t have that timeline cruft? and to talk about ¨vocabulary registries¨ and the concerns
13:26:41 <Zakim> ... they´ve had and to say the ARIA WG inherently focuses on AAPI mappings as implementations, but there are certainly other implementations to push and to say HTML WG at the
13:26:45 <Zakim> ... moment probably doesn´t accept ARIA roles as HTML semantics outside of AAPI mappings; so may need a process to work directly with them
13:26:48 <tzviya> Tzviya: If I add terms, and there's no mapping, does it validate? what happens to native semantics?
13:27:05 <tzviya> micahel: yes, it validates. defaults to native semantics
13:28:11 <tzviya> michael: if you create an HTML extension of ARIA extension, can't work apart from WG, still will take time
13:28:38 <tzviya> ...if want to work apart from WG, need to do something like create a vocabulary registry
13:28:48 <tzviya> ivan: we want something in between
13:29:36 <MichaelC> q+ to finish comments and to say a ¨dpub¨ attribute might not be a bad idea...
13:30:31 <tzviya> ...let's suppose that someone wants to create a list of math terms (proof, lemma, etc). What is the implementation of these terms? The use of these terms by publishers
13:30:56 <MichaelC> q+ to say we´re struggling with general W3C process, not specific WG process
13:30:57 <tzviya> Rich: I think what we need to do is state in the mapping guide that anything with doc- prefix is not mapped.
13:31:06 <tzviya> ack J
13:31:06 <Zakim> janina, you wanted to say that blocks experienced in one group would probably come up in another
13:32:38 <tzviya> Janina: Nervous that some of the problem is in the process. If we can improve process to make this doable, then that should be what solves the problem.
13:33:20 <tzviya> ack M
13:33:20 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to finish comments and to say a ¨dpub¨ attribute might not be a bad idea... and to say we´re struggling with general W3C process, not specific WG process
13:33:55 <tzviya> Michael: We're running into process issues
13:34:20 <tzviya> ...You're looking at semantics that don't have universal applicability, but there is a definite need.
13:34:33 <tzviya> ...I wonder if a dpub attr is what you need
13:35:01 <tzviya> ...That will allow flexibility to create math, assessment, etc terms
13:35:14 <tzviya> ... You will still need API mappings
13:35:35 <ivan> q+
13:35:47 <tzviya> ...Dealing with a broader W3C issue.
13:35:49 <tzviya> ack iv
13:36:21 <tzviya> Ivan: When we began the process 2 years ago, the other alternative was html attr
13:36:37 <MichaelC> q+
13:36:43 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has joined #dpub-aria
13:37:05 <tzviya> ...This issue came up in semantic web as well
13:37:16 <MichaelC> q+ to say ARIA module still valuable even if HTML Dpub attribute created
13:37:28 <richardschwerdtfeger> q+
13:37:31 <MichaelC> q+ to say negotiation with HTML...
13:37:45 <MichaelC> q+ to mention ARIA approach on AAMs
13:37:56 <tzviya> ...we went with ARIA because of a11y
13:38:34 <tzviya> ...what we realize now is that the notion of implementation is very different for some terms than others
13:38:34 <MichaelC> q+ to say I don´t think ARIA WG has overly strong expectations, does want to work with you
13:39:28 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
13:39:30 <MichaelC> q+ to discuss what ¨implementation¨ is
13:39:34 <tzviya> ack m
13:39:34 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say ARIA module still valuable even if HTML Dpub attribute created and to say negotiation with HTML... and to mention ARIA approach on AAMs and to say I
13:39:37 <Zakim> ... don´t think ARIA WG has overly strong expectations, does want to work with you and to discuss what ¨implementation¨ is
13:40:06 <tzviya> michael: if we go the html attr route, we have not wasted work because we will be able to adapt AAM to the attr
13:40:15 <tzviya> +1
13:40:48 <tzviya> ...ARIA is relying heavily on API Mappings
13:41:20 <tzviya> ...we are relaxing rules a little. The need for mappings still exists
13:42:12 <tzviya> ...Some of what you are struggling with is a different definition of implementation, which is a broader discussion
13:42:29 <tzviya> rich: if i don't have to do an API mapping, less work for me
13:42:56 <tzviya> ack ri
13:43:37 <mgylling> q+
13:43:38 <tzviya> ivan: the reason we selected the terms in the current dpub-aria document is that they are the basic terms
13:44:11 <MichaelC> q+ to say I have no concern with separate doc; just worry about clear complementarity; and need to know how it will get through CR
13:44:19 <richardschwerdtfeger> q+
13:44:22 <tzviya> ...if we want to have a separate document tomorrow with no mappings, do we have a mechanism?
13:44:24 <tzviya> ack mg
13:45:06 <tzviya> mgylling: anything with a doc- prefix that is not mapped is OK? Does that essentially mean that we define doc-*?
13:45:20 <MichaelC> q+ to mention controlled vocabulary, but needs negotiation (not with us, we´ll probably support)
13:45:52 <tzviya> ivan: it's not that everything is acceptable, but we can write additional specs that go through the consensus/implementation process
13:46:20 <tzviya> ack mi
13:46:20 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say I have no concern with separate doc; just worry about clear complementarity; and need to know how it will get through CR and to mention controlled
13:46:23 <Zakim> ... vocabulary, but needs negotiation (not with us, we´ll probably support)
13:47:02 <tzviya> Michael: a separate doc is not a problem, but there should be a clear rel between the multiple docs
13:47:15 <tzviya> ...we need to have a larger discussion about what implementation means
13:47:22 <tzviya> ack ri
13:48:02 <tzviya> rich: if you don't need the WG to do mappings, great. I would prefer not to look at any values.
13:48:21 <tzviya> ...You are not the only group that wants to use this for other things
13:48:40 <tzviya> ...This is a discussion to have with TAG
13:49:29 <tzviya> Markus: DPUB-ARIA is not bound to ARIA 1.1, correct?
13:50:14 <tzviya> ...for strategic reasons, we can delay TR for DPUB-ARIA
13:51:51 <tzviya> Michael: Let's come up phased plan for discussion with larger group
13:54:06 <tzviya> next meeting 6 July
13:55:14 <tzviya> rrsagent, make logs public
13:55:19 <tzviya> rrsagent, make minutes
13:55:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/06/30-dpub-aria-minutes.html tzviya
13:58:38 <tzviya> bye, zakim
13:58:43 <tzviya> zakim, bye
13:58:43 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been ivan, Tzviya, Janina, mgylling, Rich, MichaelC
13:58:43 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dpub-aria
13:59:01 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has left #dpub-aria
14:13:42 <tzviya> rrsagent, bye
14:13:42 <RRSAgent> I see no action items